Lovecraft: Hack or Genius?

[Mystery Man]

Are you sure you're reading the same article I am? Are you reading the same Lovecraft that I am? Command of the English language was not one of his strength's as a writer. IMO, his strenght's were mostly limited to brilliant and innovative ideas, which he really struggled to develop well, partly because of his lack of command of the language. Just because he used a handful of arcane and archaic adjectives does not mean he had a command of the English language.

Yes I read the article you linked to and I think you're looking for something that's not there. I personally have always likes his style for its own unique sake.

Tolkien, on the other hand, probably had the greatest command of the English language of any writer I've ever read. His ability to effortlessly jump from style to style; to keep a reader's attention through a 40 page chapter of expository dialogue and to hearken back to epic, Anglo-Saxon works just through word choice is second to none. In fact, I don't think anyone else has really even attempted it.

Truer words have never been spoken. Except for the last part, I do believe it's been attempted.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

His ability to effortlessly jump from style to style; to keep a reader's attention through a 40 page chapter of expository dialogue and to hearken back to epic, Anglo-Saxon works just through word choice is second to none.

Yes, but would you believe that there are very many readers who do NOT stick with Tolkien for all 40 pages of that. Tolkien's command of the English language is the single biggest problem to most that don't like his writing.

You don't like Lovecraft. Fine. Nothing wrong with that. But not liking him does not make him a hack.

 

[Crothian]

Both. Comtemporary and friend of Lovecraft's, Clark Ashton Smith was a good writer, for instance. Yet he was still primarily a writer of pulp magazine weird tales, and he's much less remembered today. So I think the idea that "Lovecraft isn't good by today's standard's, but he was for his time" is baloney.

Well, I wasn't saying that he was respected in his own time. I don't know what his was thought of back then. I'm just saying that is an importanty piece to note, comparing him to his contemporaries is always the best way to judge a person.

Not to mention that he mentioned several influences, including Poe, Machen, Stoker, and others who were also much better writers than he.

Have you read him? Then you can judge him. True, your judgement may be missing some details, but so what?

judging him, and actually being qualified to judge him are two different things. Reading his books does not make one qualified, there has to be a certain level of understanding of the topic and the time period.

 

[Grompi]

Why ain't it easy to call someone a hack from our point in the story? Lovecraft and Howard wrote some pretty interesting stuff given their place in literary history.

 

[Abraxas]

His ability to effortlessly jump from style to style; to keep a reader's attention through a 40 page chapter of expository dialogue and to hearken back to epic, Anglo-Saxon works just through word choice is second to none.

Gotta agree with what Ankh-Morpork Guard said about this.
What you said is subjective opinion, just like calling Lovecraft a hack (or a genius).

 

[Desdichado]

Yes, but would you believe that there are very many readers who do NOT stick with Tolkien for all 40 pages of that. Tolkien's command of the English language is the single biggest problem to most that don't like his writing.

Of course I'd believe it. Those are mostly the people who don't even get to "The Council of Elrond" in the first place, though.

I've never heard anyone complain about Tolkien's command of the English language, though. I think that's a straw man. What's complained about by those who don't get very far with Tolkien is his pacing.

You don't like Lovecraft. Fine. Nothing wrong with that. But not liking him does not make him a hack.

Hence the discussion. No need to dismiss either opinion out of hand; I'm interested in others ideas. I've always been fascinated with gamers' collective fascination with Lovecraft, so I start a thread to talk about it. This isn't meant to be insulting to anyone.

 

[Desdichado]

Well, I wasn't saying that he was respected in his own time. I don't know what his was thought of back then. I'm just saying that is an importanty piece to note, comparing him to his contemporaries is always the best way to judge a person.

I don't want to judge Lovecraft, I want to judge his works of literature and his skill in creating them. I honestly am not particularly interested in judging him as a person, or necesssarily even knowing more than I already do about his biography. As it turns out he was not important or particularly well regarded as a writer in his own time. Nobody who wrote for the pulps was.

judging him, and actually being qualified to judge him are two different things. Reading his books does not make one qualified, there has to be a certain level of understanding of the topic and the time period.

I thoroughly disagree. Anyone who's read a fair sampling of his work is qualified to judge how good it is. Same with any other author. I completely disagree that one must be an academic literary critic with a background in the history of literature, his contemporaries or anything else to judge its works on its own merits. That may be important for other types of inquiry into his works, but not for judging the quality of what he wrote on its own merits.

 

[Desdichado]

Gotta agree with what Ankh-Morpork Guard said about this.
What you said is subjective opinion, just like calling Lovecraft a hack (or a genius).

Uh, yeah, no kidding. I asked for people's opinions. Coming on board and then saying, "that's just your opinion!" is stating the blindingly obvious.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

Of course I'd believe it. Those are mostly the people who don't even get to "The Council of Elrond" in the first place, though.

I've never heard anyone complain about Tolkien's command of the English language, though. I think that's a straw man. What's complained about by those who don't get very far with Tolkien is his pacing.

I have heard some complaints about his lofty language and such. Never has bothered me, and I love Tolkien's style, but I have seen it mentioned before. Though you're right, pacing is the usual complaint.

Hence the discussion. No need to dismiss either opinion out of hand; I'm interested in others ideas. I've always been fascinated with gamers' collective fascination with Lovecraft, so I start a thread to talk about it. This isn't meant to be insulting to anyone.

The initial tone of your posts just seemed a little 'agree with me!!'. Honestly, I don't even understand my own fascination with Lovecraft. Something about how he writes draws me in. Not scary, no, but creepy would work for a good amount of his stories. Its really nothing like anything else I've read, and that's part of the draw for me.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

The answer of course is both, contrary to Mr. Dyal's opinion HPL actually had a very good grasp on the English Language, read his letters for a better idea of his abilities in that regard rather than trust to his stories.

Part of the difficulty is who he chose to emulate in his writings, Algernon Blackwood, Clark Ashton Smith, Edgar Allen Poe, and Lord Dunsany in particular. (I would actually cite C. A. Smith as the worse offender in regards to style.)

The other problem, and the one that makes me agree with the term 'hack' is that he wrote for the pulp magazines of the 1920s and '30s. Yes, the format that you are writing for does impact whether or not you are a hack, and in fact Charles Dickens referred to himself as a hack! And I would certainly place Dickens as a good writer, with a firm grasp of language. The format enforced certain limitations, one of which was that unless you had some other means of support you rushed the stories out. Otherwise you might well starve to death as a writer. (HPL missed more than one meal as it was.) And finally, whether you like his style or not, the editor of Weird Tales did a very, very poor job of editing, being more concerned that the story fit the number of column inches he required than that it be a well written story.

The need to rush things out was not something that Tolkien ever had to worry about, he could and would take a decade to polish things. The books produced after his death suffered because he had not had the time to add that polish.

The Auld Grump